San Diego Measure A:
What the San Diego Measure A empty homes tax Tax Could Mean for Multifamily Owners
San Diego Voters Will Decide Measure A in June 2026
San Diego voters will decide Measure A on the June 2, 2026 ballot. While some property owners have confused the proposal with a state housing bill, Measure A is not a state senate bill. It is a local City of San Diego ballot measure that would create an annual tax on certain vacant non-primary residences within the City of San Diego.
If approved, Measure A would apply to residential properties that are not claimed as a primary residence and are left vacant for more than 182 days per calendar year. The proposed tax would begin at $8,000 in 2027, increase to $10,000 in 2028, and then adjust annually for inflation starting in 2029. Properties owned by a corporate entity would face an additional surcharge of $4,000 in 2027 and $5,000 in 2028, also subject to inflation adjustments after that.
The measure is designed to discourage long-term vacancies and encourage owners to either rent, occupy, or sell unused housing. According to the City’s official materials, the revenue would be deposited into the City’s General Fund and could be used for municipal services, including housing, infrastructure, libraries, parks, public safety, and other city services. Because this is structured as a general tax, the revenue would not be legally restricted to one specific housing program.
What Measure A Would Tax
Measure A targets what the City describes as “non-primary homes” or “empty homes.” In practical terms, the tax would apply when a residential unit meets both of the following conditions:
It is not the owner’s primary residence; and
It is vacant for more than 182 days in a calendar year.
The tax would not apply to owner-occupied primary residences, long-term residential leases, and certain exempt situations. Reported exemptions include properties occupied by family, properties impacted by natural disasters, newly constructed properties actively marketed for sale or rent, certain military service situations, and vacancies following an owner’s death. KPBS also reported an exemption for properties with four or fewer units where the owner occupies one of the units for most of the year.
That distinction matters. The measure is not written as a blanket tax on every second home, every rental property, or every apartment building. The central issue is whether the property, or potentially the residential unit, is a non-primary residence that remains vacant for more than half the year.
How Much Revenue Could Measure A Generate?
The City’s Independent Budget Analyst estimated that Measure A could generate between $9.2 million and $21.4 million in the first year of implementation, increasing to between $10.5 million and $24.3 million in the second year. Those estimates depend heavily on how many properties are ultimately taxable, how many claim exemptions, and whether property owners respond by occupying, renting, or selling vacant homes.
The City estimated approximately 5,140 properties could potentially be eligible for the tax, though the actual number taxed may be lower due to exemptions or owner behavior changes. inewsource separately reported that the measure is expected to affect less than 1% of homes in San Diego and estimated about 5,100 homes meet the threshold.
Why Multifamily Owners Should Pay Attention
For most traditional apartment owners, the immediate impact of Measure A may be limited if units are leased to long-term tenants or are actively operated as rental housing. The official fiscal statement states that exemptions would include properties leased to tenants, and the City Attorney’s analysis says the tax would not apply to long-term residential leases.
That said, multifamily owners should still pay attention for three reasons.
First, the measure appears to focus on residential units, not just detached single-family homes. For brokerage, lending, appraisal, and investment purposes, a 5+ unit apartment building is typically treated as a commercial multifamily asset. However, that does not necessarily mean the individual units inside the building are not residential living quarters. If the City interprets Measure A at the unit level, a vacant apartment unit inside a commercial multifamily property could potentially be reviewed under the measure.
Second, many San Diego multifamily properties are owned in an LLC, corporation, partnership, or other entity structure for liability, estate planning, financing, or management purposes. The official ballot summary refers to an additional charge for “Empty Homes owned by a corporate entity.” The measure language also appears to define corporate ownership broadly, including corporations, partnerships, limited liability companies, real estate investment trusts, and similar entities. Owners should not assume that an LLC-owned property is automatically exempt from the corporate surcharge simply because it is not a traditional corporation.
Third, multifamily vacancies can occur for legitimate reasons: major renovations, fire or flood damage, delayed permits, estate transitions, financing issues, tenant turnover, code compliance work, or strategic repositioning. Some of those situations may qualify for exemptions, but owners will likely need documentation if the measure passes.
The Multifamily Impact: LLCs, Corporations, and Vacant Units
For multifamily owners, the key question is not simply, “Do I own my property in an LLC?” The better question is: Are any residential units in the property non-primary, not leased long-term, and vacant for more than 182 days in the calendar year?
If the answer is no, the measure may have little to no impact. A stabilized apartment building with tenants in place should generally fall outside the target of the tax because long-term residential leases are excluded.
If the answer is yes, the risk becomes more meaningful. For example, if an LLC-owned apartment property has one or more units intentionally held vacant for more than half the year, those units could potentially be reviewed under the measure. If the ownership structure is treated as a corporate entity, the surcharge could increase the annual tax exposure from $8,000 to $12,000 per vacant unit in 2027, and from $10,000 to $15,000 per vacant unit in 2028, before future inflation adjustments.
This is especially relevant for owners who hold units vacant during extended renovations, repositioning plans, entitlement strategies, or sale preparation. Ordinary turnover is unlikely to trigger the 183-day threshold, but prolonged vacancy could become a measurable carrying cost if Measure A passes.
How Measure A Could Affect Airbnb and Short-Term Rental Owners
Measure A does not appear to tax Airbnbs simply because they are short-term rentals. Earlier versions discussed taxing whole-home short-term rentals, but the version going to voters in June 2026 focuses on empty homes, not STRs as a separate category. The gray area is occupancy. If a whole-home Airbnb is not a primary residence and sits vacant for more than 182 days per year, it could potentially face exposure depending on how the City enforces the measure.
This matters most for seasonal rentals, underperforming Airbnbs, second homes, or STRs held in an LLC or corporate structure. If Measure A passes, owners should track actual booked/occupied nights, not just whether the property was listed or available online.
Example: Potential Impact on an LLC-Owned Apartment Building
Assume a 10-unit apartment building is owned by an LLC. From an investment, lending, and brokerage perspective, that property would generally be considered commercial multifamily. However, the units themselves are still residential living quarters. That distinction is important because Measure A appears to focus on whether a residential unit is vacant, not simply whether the overall asset is considered residential or commercial by lenders and brokers.
In this example, assume nine units are leased to long-term tenants, but one unit is intentionally kept vacant for more than 183 days in 2027 while the owner evaluates whether to renovate, sell, or convert the space. If the City interprets the measure at the unit level, and if that vacant apartment is treated as a taxable non-primary residential unit, the owner could potentially face the empty homes tax on that unit. If the LLC is also treated as a corporate entity for surcharge purposes, the potential tax could be:
2027: $8,000 base tax + $4,000 corporate surcharge = $12,000
2028: $10,000 base tax + $5,000 corporate surcharge = $15,000
This example should not be read to mean that every vacant unit in every apartment building will automatically be taxed. The final impact will depend on how the City implements the measure, how it defines and verifies vacancy, what exemptions apply, and whether the measure is administered at the property level or unit level.
However, it does show why multifamily owners should not dismiss Measure A simply because they own a “commercial” apartment building. If the measure passes, owners of LLC- or corporate-owned multifamily properties should pay close attention to long-term vacant units and keep strong documentation for any legitimate vacancy, renovation, marketing, or exemption-related reason.
What Owners Should Do Now
Measure A has not yet been approved by voters, and the final enforcement rules would matter. However, apartment owners should begin thinking about how they would document occupancy, leasing activity, exemptions, and vacancy timelines if the measure passes. Owners should consider keeping clean records of lease dates, tenant move-ins and move-outs, renovation timelines, permits, contractor invoices, marketing efforts, and reasons for extended vacancy. If a unit is vacant because it is being repaired, renovated, actively marketed, or temporarily uninhabitable, documentation may become important.
For owners holding property in an LLC or corporation, this is also a good time to speak with a qualified real estate attorney or tax advisor about how the measure may define “corporate entity” if implemented. The official ballot materials clearly identify a corporate-owned surcharge, but practical application to different ownership structures will need to be watched closely.
Bottom Line for San Diego Multifamily Owners
Measure A is not a state senate bill and it is not a broad tax on every rental property. It is a local San Diego ballot measure aimed at non-primary residences that are vacant for more than 182 days per year. For most operating multifamily owners with long-term tenants in place, the direct impact may be limited. But for LLC- or corporate-owned properties with units held vacant for extended periods, Measure A could create a new annual carrying cost and additional compliance burden.
The biggest takeaway is simple: if Measure A passes, vacancy will need to be tracked more carefully. Multifamily owners should avoid assuming that entity-owned rental property is automatically unaffected. The better approach is to review vacancy exposure at the unit level, maintain strong documentation, and watch for the City’s implementing rules if the measure is approved.
References
City of San Diego, City Clerk — Petition and Ballot Measures
sandiego.gov/city-clerk/elections/process
City of San Diego, City Attorney — Title, Summary, and City Attorney Impartial Analysis for Measure A
City of San Diego, Independent Budget Analyst — Fiscal Impact Statement for Measure A
sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/2026-03/fiscal-impact-statement-measure-a-empty-homes-tax_0.pdf
California Apartment Association — “San Diego council sends empty homes tax to June ballot over legal objections”
caanet.org/san-diego-council-sends-empty-homes-tax-to-june-ballot-over-legal-objections/
If you’d like to discuss the realistic value of your property or explore current market conditions, our team is always happy to provide insight. You can give us a call or fill out our confidential valuation form. Check out Christina Labowicz resume at Homes.com